Featured

Rudy Giuliani held in contempt of court in Georgia election workers case

Rudy Giuliani held in contempt of court in Georgia election workers case
UPI

Jan. 6 (UPI) — A federal judge in New York held former Mayor Rudy Giuliani in contempt of court Monday for failing to turn over information and $11 million in personal assets to two former Georgia election workers he defamed after former President Donald Trump’s election loss in 2020.

Judge Lewis Liman ruled in favor of Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss as they try to collect on a $148 million judgment against Giuliani from 2023.

Giuliani, 80, made a virtual court appearance Monday after he was ordered to turn over a penthouse apartment, luxury watches and a vintage Mercedes-Benz convertible, as well as other items, including a signed Joe DiMaggio shirt and his grandfather’s pocket watch.

Attorneys “might be happy to fight to take away Mayor Giuliani’s most cherished personal belongings including his signed baseball jersey of his childhood hero and his grandfather’s pocket watch, but they can never take away his extraordinary record of public service,” Giuliani’s representative Ted Goodman said in a statement.

While Giuliani has given Moss and Freeman the 1980 convertible Mercedes, he has not turned over the car’s title. Giuliani testified Monday that he could not locate the title and testified he is also having trouble finding the Joe DiMaggio jersey “because I do not know where it is and it’s hard to recreate who took it.”

“I am personally conducting my own investigation,” Giuliani testified, shortly before the judge ruled him in contempt.

“The only conclusion the court can draw, and the one which it does draw, is that defendant has been attempting to run the clock, thwarting plaintiff’s efforts to get plainly relevant information by stalling,” Liman told the court.

“He has testified that he did not respond because he suspected the motives of plaintiff’s counsel. That is not an excuse for violating the court’s orders,” the judge added.

“More important, as the court informed the defendant, if there was reason to believe the plaintiff’s counsel misused discovery or would misuse discovery, he could raise that with the court,” Liman said. “It was not an excuse to take the law into his own hands.”

via January 6th 2025